I don't know anything about the conversations with ASF but I suspect for
them it is a policy issue.
They have 200 projects and don't want to have to follow-up with each one
to see when their use of the ASF infrastructure is excessive.
They don't have the resources to chase each project to verify the source
of the SVN traffic.
They have some projects that get tens of thousands of downloads per day
and some that don't have 10 in a week.
If OFBiz never becomes a "successful" product, there is no problem but
before it gets to be the number 2 or three ERP, this will cause ASF a
big headache.
Ron
On 13/11/2014 4:51 PM, Pierre Smits wrote:
That is not difficult to assess. Do a download from trunk, and see how many
Mb's are transferred. Do a ./ant clean-all. Subsequently remove all hidden
files in .svn folders. Finally do a zip of the cleaned download and compare the
original amount of Mb's with the size of the zip file. That difference is what
is saved on storage and transfer cost of trunk code.
Now multiply that with the number of branches you had in mind.
Verstuurd vanaf mijn iPad
Op 13 nov. 2014 om 22:32 heeft Jacques Le Roux <jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com>
het volgende geschreven:
Le 13/11/2014 21:25, Ron Wheeler a écrit :
Is it Apache's concern that while people may be free to choose, ASF server
capacity is not free nor unlimited?
I doubt that OFBiz really puts a big load on the ASF infrastructure but users
are not supposed to be downloading from the SVN.
They are supposed to get downloads from local mirrors.
You said it :) At the moment I don't fear any overload on the svn server from
users downloading from releases branches instead of released packages. OFBiz is
not Tomcat ;)
But I must say I have no measures, so you got a point until-we/if-we-can
discover that. Because users can already do that, I think it's fair to use this
method as long as it's reasonable.
Of course, having that suggested in a TLP project could be viewed as an abuse
from the Board, but let's be pragmatic, numbers should tell us the truth (if
can get them)
That may be the practical side of Apache's urging to get the releases following
their guidelines.
Yes for Tomcat, HTTPD or such that's understandable. For OFBiz I "fear" it's
not a problem. Can we discuss with the board in case, instead of hiding behind unknown
numbers?
Jacques
Ron
On 13/11/2014 3:13 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
Le 13/11/2014 20:03, Ron Wheeler a écrit :
Does this solve ASF's issue about having users access the main servers?
I don't try to solve an issue, just to propose an alternative. It's a free user
choice, but with more elements
What do you put on the mirrors and how do you stop users from accessing the
development SVN which is ASF's concern?
Things stay as they are, it's only that we inform our users than another way is
possible and we give them enough elements of comparison to choice, it's called
freedom
Jacques
Ron
On 13/11/2014 1:55 PM, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
For the licence free issues (an other related stuff) we could put a disclaimer
in the wiki page where all alternatives would be explained
Jacques
Le 13/11/2014 12:38, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :
In the past the ASF Board asked to the OFBiz PMC to fix the release
strategy of the project by providing officially voted release files thru
the ASF mirrors: at that time we were pushing the users to get the trunk.
Officially asking the user to use a release branch would be better than the
trunk but would bring back similar concerns: an official vote is required
to publish a product to the outside of the project in order to guarantee
License free issues etc...
On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 11:38 AM, Jacques Le Roux <
jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com> wrote:
Hi,
In a recent user ML threadhttp://markmail.org/message/ivjocjr2ull7lwqe I
suggested we could propose our users to use a release branch strategy
rather than downloaded packages.
And that we could expose this way of doing in our download page, or maybe
better with a link to an explaining page (in details) in the wiki.
I know it's not the recommended way of doing at the ASF. But we all know
the OFBiz differences when compared with other TLPs which are mostly libs,
and even mostly jars.
Most of us are actually using this way in their custom projects and I have
a feeling it would not only help our users but also us to support them.
What do you think?
Jacques
--
Ron Wheeler
President
Artifact Software Inc
email: rwhee...@artifact-software.com
skype: ronaldmwheeler
phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102
